Opinion
2:21-cv-1389 DB P
08-18-2021
BRANDON LeBLUE, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
DEBORAH BARNES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has also filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
The federal venue statute provides that a civil action “may be brought in (1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this action, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court's personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
Venue of this action is technically appropriate in the Eastern District of California because the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation resides in this district. Nevertheless, the court is transferring this action to the Central District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) in the interests of justice for the following reasons.
Plaintiff complains that correctional counselors at the California Rehabilitation Center (“CRC”) improperly denied him assignment to a fire camp. The CRC is located in Riverside County, which is part of the Central District of California. Because the events giving rise to plaintiffs claim occurred in the Central District, it is appropriate that those claims be litigated in that district.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is transferred to the Central District of California.